3 ms·

Batteries are not produced at a scale nearly large enough to be impactful. The world consumes 2,500 TWh of electricity per hour. And that's set to increase as l

Batteries are not produced at a scale nearly large enough to be impactful. The world consumes 2,500 TWh of electricity per hour. And that's set to increase as less wealthy countries develop and start demanding A/C, street lights, etc. And on top of that, electricity production is only ~40% of carbon emissions (meaning, electrifying heating, transport, metallurgy, etc. will drive up electricity demand even further). By comparison, the world produces 300-400 GWh of batteries each year. Most of which is going to electronics and electric vehicles. Battery production has been increasing, but it's unclear if the supply of input materials can keep up. The price of lithium jumped 400% last year: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/lithium https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/lithium In short, the chart on the right is not something to be taken for granted: https://www.tsungxu.com/content/images/size/w1600/2022/01/solar-battery-tipping-intro-1.jpeg https://www.tsungxu.com/content/images/size/w1600/2022/01/so... Moore's law is the exception, not the norm, because making chips faster works by making transistors smaller. This doesn't apply to most products, as even zero manufacturing costs cannot bring cost below input materials. Imagine the cost of a car went from $500,000 in 1910, $50,000 in 1920, and $5,000 in 1930. Is is safe to assume that a car would cost $5 in 1960 and $0.50 in 1970?

flgb 4y ago
> “And on top of that, electricity production is only ~40% of carbon emissions.” We are electrifying heating and transport. As a result about 80% of end-use energy will end up being electricity.
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  That's my point: electrifying heating and transportation will increase electricity use beyond the current 2.5Tw and make it even harder to provision the same duration of grid storage. I added the content in parentheses in case this was unclear.
  - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
    Higher Electricity demand isn't really a problem though. The motto "electrify everything" is used. It is not a big surprise that this, and developing nations growth, requires electricity. That's why everyone is really pleased that renewables and batteries are the cheapest way to deploy electricity generation in history.
    - Manuel_D 4y ago
      Higher electricity demand is a problem is you're trying to. Build grid storage. And no, not everyone is onboard with the idea that battery cost is going to plunge by orders of magnitude. In fact, the opposite trend is happening. Battery costs have increased recently: https://www.utilitydive.com/news/new-york-battery-storage-costs-rise-interconnection-queue-12-gw/621954/ https://www.utilitydive.com/news/new-york-battery-storage-co...
      - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
        Your cite says: > the state's higher storage target and DPS and grid operator support will slash costs to $150-$200 kWh by the end of the decade, based on BloombergNEF estimates. They have dropped an order of magnitude since 2008, so I'd maybe expect a few more years before it does it again but that does appear to be the current prediction.
        Manuel_D 4y ago
        Announcing a target is easy, hitting is hard. Especially when the costs of input materials to build batteries increase 4x in a year: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/lithium https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/lithium If their predictions are that costs are going to decrease, but when push comes to shove costs increase above expectations then what does that say about the value of these predictions?

flgb 4y ago

> “And on top of that, electricity production is only ~40% of carbon emissions.” We are electrifying heating and transport. As a result about 80% of end-use energy will end up being electricity.

Manuel_D 4y ago
That's my point: electrifying heating and transportation will increase electricity use beyond the current 2.5Tw and make it even harder to provision the same duration of grid storage. I added the content in parentheses in case this was unclear.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  Higher Electricity demand isn't really a problem though. The motto "electrify everything" is used. It is not a big surprise that this, and developing nations growth, requires electricity. That's why everyone is really pleased that renewables and batteries are the cheapest way to deploy electricity generation in history.
  - Manuel_D 4y ago
    Higher electricity demand is a problem is you're trying to. Build grid storage. And no, not everyone is onboard with the idea that battery cost is going to plunge by orders of magnitude. In fact, the opposite trend is happening. Battery costs have increased recently: https://www.utilitydive.com/news/new-york-battery-storage-costs-rise-interconnection-queue-12-gw/621954/ https://www.utilitydive.com/news/new-york-battery-storage-co...
    - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
      Your cite says: > the state's higher storage target and DPS and grid operator support will slash costs to $150-$200 kWh by the end of the decade, based on BloombergNEF estimates. They have dropped an order of magnitude since 2008, so I'd maybe expect a few more years before it does it again but that does appear to be the current prediction.
      - Manuel_D 4y ago
        Announcing a target is easy, hitting is hard. Especially when the costs of input materials to build batteries increase 4x in a year: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/lithium https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/lithium If their predictions are that costs are going to decrease, but when push comes to shove costs increase above expectations then what does that say about the value of these predictions?